Family To Receive $1.5M+ In Vaccine-Autism Award 594
An anonymous reader, quoting from CBS News, writes "'The first court award in a vaccine-autism claim is a big one. CBS News has learned the family of Hannah Poling will receive more than $1.5 million for her life care, lost earnings, and pain and suffering for the first year alone. In addition to the first year, the family will receive more than $500,000 per year to pay for Hannah's care. Those familiar with the case believe the compensation could easily amount to $20 million over the child's lifetime. ... In acknowledging Hannah's injuries, the government said vaccines aggravated an unknown mitochondrial disorder Hannah had which didn't 'cause' her autism, but 'resulted' in it. It's unknown how many other children have similar undiagnosed mitochondrial disorders. All other autism 'test cases' have been defeated at trial. Approximately 4,800 are awaiting disposition in federal vaccine court.' How did this happen when all the scientific data points otherwise?"
Re:Really? (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Now you know (Score:1, Interesting)
Because there is money to earn in allergy medication; and barely anything (except to recover production costs) in government regulated vaccines?
Re:Now you know (Score:5, Interesting)
Manufactures of vaccines are granted immunity from lawsuit. The money for this will come out of tax payers pockets. Incidentally it means that nobody involved had any benefit to fight paying these people.
Re:Legal outcomes include luck (Score:5, Interesting)
They didn't sue the drug company. They sued in a special court where the payout comes from the tax payers.
They won because nobody had any incentive at all to fight them.
Terrible... (Score:3, Interesting)
Five years later, the government settled the case before trial and had it sealed.
In just about every way imaginable, this is the wrong thing to do. We're now going to have more fear-mongering about vaccines with everyone pointing at this case, and because it's sealed, no-one will know why.
It sounds terrible that vaccine + undiagnosed mitochondrial disorder can result in autism, but what happened should be open so that we can learn from it.
Re:Another great step backwards... (Score:3, Interesting)
>>but if you consider the vast numbers of people who receive vaccinations with no issues at all, the side-effect cases are extremely minute
Are they? A friend of mine had her baby immunized, took it home, and then it went into seizures a few hours later. Nearly died.
The asked the doctor in the ER if it could have been caused by the vaccines. He said, "Not a chance, there's no evidence they cause seizures." And then promptly didn't file it as a possible complication from the vaccine.
Chicken. Egg.
Re:Previous condition (Score:4, Interesting)
He's not doubting that this doesn't vindicate the vaccine conspiracy theorists ideas. He's saying that no matter how correct you are, these nuts will still point to this as a reason why they should be given money as well.
Re:What? (Score:5, Interesting)
Thanks for the vindication.
But unfortunately a few anti-vaccine Nazi types with mod points burning holes in their pockets came tearing through this comment thread not long after I posted that.
When I first read this and I thought almost immediately about April Fools stories on /. primarily because an estimated 20 million award seems punitive and excessively so. And who is being punished here? You and I and everyone else who had nothing to do with this.
While I feel sorry for this girl and her family, it is not my fault this happened. And I cannot see how providing care for this girl could possibly cost this kind of money. It would have made more sense to have a reasonable pain and suffering award up front, plus some reasonable standard of living allowance annually, plus the government picking up the tab on all related medical costs. Somehow I doubt the total of which would come anywhere near 20 million
Re:Another great step backwards... (Score:4, Interesting)
Call me a bastard, but it would save the family $20 million if that child just died. Sure, helping a child without a leg, or allergic to glucose even, is much more reasonable, because they will eventually get to be adults who have some kind of job and generally can 'have a life' that they can support. But if you spend $500 thousand per year on someone, how do you justify it? For that much money you could keep a lot more children in perfect health and give them an 'ideal' upbringing so that they will have an enjoyable and full life on their own.
Life ain't fair. Shame we don't have natural predators to kill such people like me and her.
Re:Previous condition (Score:3, Interesting)
Healthy lives and Vaccination doesn't have much to do with eachother, the thing is that there is a very high mortality rate among unvaccinated children because there exists a lot of easily vaccinated diseases that are dangerous, I'll let Pen and Teller illustrate.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfdZTZQvuCo [youtube.com]
Re:Previous condition (Score:3, Interesting)
Umm, and why are you telling me this, considering I said the same thing with (almost) less emotion?
Re:Previous condition (Score:1, Interesting)
Still, what gauls me the most about this sort of rampant trumpeting by the anti-vaccination folks is the incredible hubris it demonstrates.
Gaul [wikipedia.org] (Latin: Gallia) is a historical name used in the context of Ancient Rome in references to the region of Western Europe approximating present day France, Luxembourg and Belgium, most of Switzerland, the western part of Northern Italy, as well as the parts of the Netherlands and Germany on the left bank of the Rhine.
gall [merriam-webster.com]:
1
a : bile; especially bile obtained from an animal and used in the arts or medicine
b : something bitter to endure
c : bitterness of spirit, rancor
2: brazen boldness coupled with impudent assurance and insolence
I believe definition 1,b of gall is the word you were actually looking for.
Re:Legal outcomes include luck (Score:3, Interesting)
As a taxpayer, I feel like I should've been notified of my right to face my accuser. Who can I sue over this?
Re:What? (Score:3, Interesting)
Absolutely. Without going into the specifics of his case, he is certainly better off than other children his mother (my sister) has worked with in the autism community. The point was, rather, that $1.5M plus over $500k per year is excessive.
Re:What? (Score:5, Interesting)
Has anyone noticed the summary repeats itself?
WOW. I had no idea such a system existed. Thanks for the information. A special "vaccine damage" court is a good idea, because it prevents the 1 billion awards we might otherwise see in the normal courts. Also 20 million doesn't sound high to me. If the kid lives another 80 years, that's only 250,000 a year - which is probably how much it would cost to keep the girl alive. I had no idea such a system existed. Thanks for the information. A special "vaccine damage" court is a good idea, because it prevents the 1 billion awards we might otherwise see in the normal courts. Also 20 million doesn't sound high to me. If the kid lives another 80 years, that's only 250,000 a year -
PENN & TELLER ripped a giant hole in the "vaccines are dangerous" theory using balls and bowling pins. Basically they said, even if we assume the vaccine causes autism, that's still just 1 autistic death per approximately one million children versus ~10,000 dead from communicable disease if they were Not vaccinated. Like gambling you play the odds and take the vaccine because it's less dangerous than going without.
Long Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aky-sRri-NQ [youtube.com]
Short Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfdZTZQvuCo [youtube.com]
Personal attacks have no bearing (Score:4, Interesting)
Unfortunately, a Slashdot reader believes that a personal attack will pass muster with this community. We are too smart for that. When doctors talk of obesity they often state, our genetics didn't change, so environmental factors must be contributing to the rise in obesity. The same must be said for Autism. Our genetics did not change, so there must be an environmental factor (or factors). The thing that bothers me is that people become polarized over the issue.
The parents of Autistic children (I am one) tend to focus too much on one environmental factor (Vaccines) when there are plenty of other factors. They also discount the benefits that vaccines have provided to our society in general. The "informed" community ignores research that does not concur with their point of view while making character attacks by associating those parents with Playboy.
Both groups have some valid points, but will never make progress while pointing the finger at each other. My hope is that a group will come together with open minds to research Autism no matter where the evidence leads them. For instance:
The industry that I work in (computers & electronics) seems to be the worst at contaminating the environment. According to National Geographic, electronics account for less than 2% of landfill waste while contributing 70% of landfill toxicity.
http://s.ngm.com/2008/01/high-tech-trash/computer-interactive
Funny how the rise in Autism closely matches the rise of this industry. Are there any statisticians interested in looking into this?
There is also a factor of chemical contamination, which is largely undocumented in public records. Companies can register various chemicals as perfumes, apply for trademark protection, and withhold the chemical composition based on trade secrets.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2010/01/by_scott_hensley_debates_rage.html
When it comes to vaccines, however, I am still wary of the methods of sterilization, including the addition of Formaldehyde, Aluminum, and Mercury (still in the multi-dose flu shot). Although I am not a health professional, I understand that many diseases have been mitigated through vaccination, and that vaccines have been very effective. Personally, I would hope that vaccine sterilization is best achieved through gamma radiation of single dose vials. Then again, some people go crazy with the word "radiation".
I have followed Dr. Wakefield's ethical case, and understand that his methods were at question, and his results have not been duplicated in humans. Although there is a new study which calls the vaccine regimen of the 1990s into question.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20628439
I also understand that it is not in the interest of vaccine manufacturers to find a link with Autism.
http://www.askdrsears.com/thevaccinebook/labels/Vaccines%20and%20Autism.asp
I also suspect that there is a link to the bowel. I don't know an Autistic kid who doesn't have bowel problems, but that is a limited view. For my son, treatment for Candida and the use of probiotics has helped enormously.
http://www.pnas.org/content/107/33/14691
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/abstract/peds.2009-1862v1
When he stops taking probiotics, however, his symptoms reappear. Stool samples have been used to verify the issues. A gluten free / casein free diet helps both Stephen, and the family member with MS.
http://esciencenews.com/articles/2010/07/21/toxic.trio.identified.basis.celiac.disease
http://www.jimmunol.org/cgi/content/full/182/7/4158#TI
I seem to recall a recent Slashdot article about Gluten, but cant find it anymore.
So what this really comes down to for me is, "You are what you eat, drink, breathe, etc." Autism appears to have both a genetic and environmental component. We have to stop bickering over this crap and start working to resolve the issue. Anybody interested?
Re:What? (Score:2, Interesting)
I am not an anti-vaccine nazi but our son had a severe reaction to a vaccination when he was small.. and he is also autistic. I don't believe that the vaccination caused his autism but there are a lot of associated issues that resulted from the vaccine reaction that I do not believe would have happened eventually.
Every vaccination has some risk attached to it but the benefits of mass vaccination (herd immunity, wiping out terrible diseases) are considered to be overwhelming. Problem is that there is so much weight and force behind the vaccination campaigns and industry that parents are seldom, if ever, informed of the risks and any dissent is suppressed in no uncertain terms. My wife is a public health medicine professional and a researcher; she has some obvious concerns about vaccinations given our experience and was interested in developing a study to find and correlate some of the negative responses. She was quietly told that this was not a fruitful area to look in and that they expected a different direction for her studies. No real threat but definitely suppression.
I am not a conspiracy theory guy but I am suspicious of three things:
1. Informed consent is not being obtained because of fear of the effect on vaccination compliance.
2. Real issues are being ignored or not looked at because they are considered anomalies (like the ozone data from the Antarctic) or because the massive pro-vaccination belief suppresses research.
3. There is under reporting of issues at the public health front because of data suppression (probably unintended). That is, something happens related to the vaccination but is not reported as such because there is no belief that there is a relationship.
I doubt that true informed consent was obtained from the parents in Hanah Poling's case.
Re:What? (Score:5, Interesting)
This is not how vaccination rewards are decided. They are a part of the special VAERS program which is decided by a "vaccine" court NVICP (http://www.hrsa.gov/vaccinecompensation/). There are actually experts who decide compensation.
Yeah, that I understand, but what I don't understand is why the NVICP makes irrational decisions that favor the people who claim that their injury was caused by a "plausable" mechanism.
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp0802904 [nejm.org]
Unfortunately, in recent years the VICP seems to have turned its back on science. In 2005, Margaret Althen successfully claimed that a tetanus vaccine had caused her optic neuritis. Although there was no evidence to support her claim, the VICP ruled that if a petitioner proposed a biologically plausible mechanism by which a vaccine could cause harm, as well as a logical sequence of cause and effect, an award should be granted. The door opened by this and other rulings...
No case, however, represented a greater deviation from the VICP's original standards than that of Dorothy Werderitsh, who in 2006 successfully claimed that a hepatitis B vaccine had caused her multiple sclerosis. By the time of the ruling, several studies had shown that hepatitis B vaccine neither caused nor exacerbated the disease, and the Institute of Medicine had concluded that “evidence favors rejection of a causal relationship between hepatitis B vaccine and multiple sclerosis...."
What is this NVICP and why do they accept these unscientific claims of "biologically plausible mechanism"? Are they ignorant of science? Or are they required by the words of the legislation to accept claims like this?
Re:What? (Score:3, Interesting)
FTFY. ;)
Re:What? (Score:3, Interesting)
There will always be a conflict of interest there because the medical professionals, even if not practicing, may remember a time when they did something like that and be biased because of it.
As opposed to laypeople who'll go "what the fuck does that mean?" and "Screw it. I'll just find for the plaintiff, coz' lookit at the cute little kid who suffered cuzza the big bad doctor"? If you allow for the possibility of medical professionals being biased, I don't see how the solution is getting ignorant people to decide cases where a deep knowledge of medicine is needed to even understand the issue at hand. No thank you, better to be biased by medical facts than some obscure ideology.
Justice should be blind, not stupid. Of course, my opinion is worth crap here, because any shyster who succeeded in extorting 20mil in a case like this would have had to start out by systematically eradicating any vestiges of medial knowledge from the jury. I can just see the pretrial questions: "How is babby formed?"
Re:What? (Score:2, Interesting)
That I agree with, put the bulk of the award to research.
I am not in favor of letting the government have anything but big crayons to write with, let alone handle much outside their constitutional duties. They still barely run a post office and their record for protecting borders is pretty tell tale of the accomplishments of a bureaucracy driven by a million different agendas. Private sector research is a best bet.
N' of course all the pro vaccination chickenheads with mod points descended on my parent because I have a meta view that they don't. Typical...
Re:What? (Score:3, Interesting)